Editing Distressed securities (section)

===Argentina ===
In 2001, [[Argentina]] [[December 2001 riots in Argentina|defaulted]] on roughly $81 billion. NML Capital, LTD., a hedge fund that is a subsidiary of [[Elliott Management Corporation]], purchased Argentine debt on a [[secondary market]] for a lower price. Ninety-two percent of creditors restructured in 2005 and 2010 for roughly $0.30 on the dollar.<ref>{{cite news|last=Moffett|first=Mathew|title=Argentina Releases Debt-Swap Details|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303950104575185772669803524?mod=googlewsj|access-date=5 March 2013|work=The Wall Street Journal|date=April 16, 2010}}</ref> NML Capital rejected the proposal and sued Argentina for the full amount in New York State courts. NML Capital's main argument is that the "[[pari passu]]"—[[Latin]] for "on equal footing"—clause in the original contract requires Argentina to pay back all of its creditors, including those who did not agree to restructure, if it paid back one creditor.<ref>{{cite web|title=The pari passu clause and the Argentine case | url = http://www.allenovery.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/The%20pari%20passu%20clause%20and%20the%20Argentine%20case.pdf|work=Overy and Allen Global Law Intelligence Unit|publisher=Web|access-date=5 March 2013}}</ref> Since Argentina had already begun to repay the creditors that restructured, Elliot argued that it also deserved to be paid back.

On October 2, 2012, [[NML Capital Limited|NML Capital Ltd.]], a hedge fund based in the [[Cayman Islands]], which held Argentine debt not included in [[Argentine debt restructuring]],<ref name="[2010] EWCA Civ 41">{{cite web|title=Republic of ''Argentina v. NML Capital''|url=http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/41.html|publisher=Royal Courts of Justice|access-date=October 19, 2012|date=April 2, 2010}}</ref> impounded the ''[[ARA Libertad (Q-2)|Libertad]]'', an Argentine Navy training ship in [[Tema]], [[Ghana]]. The Ghanaian court held that Argentina had waived sovereign immunity when it contracted the [[sovereign debt]] being enforced.<ref name=NYT101812>{{cite news|title=Seizure of Ship From Argentina Forces Shake-Up|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/world/americas/seizure-of-argentine-ship-forces-shake-up.html|access-date=October 19, 2012|work=The New York Times|date=October 19, 2012|author=Emily Schmall}}</ref>

In November 2012, the New York State Court ruled in favor of Elliot and the other holdouts on the merits of the ''pari passu'' argument, and ordered Argentina to pay $1.3 billion on December 15—the very same date that Argentina was supposed to pay the creditors who had agreed to the restructure. An appeals court heard oral arguments on February 27, and in June 2014, the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] rejected Argentina's appeal.<ref name="au.finance.yahoo.com">[https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/argentina-makes-debt-case-us-063530886.html "Argentina makes debt case in US newspapers"], AFP wire, June 23, 2014</ref> The [[Center for Economic and Policy Research]] reported on an [[Organization of American States]] special meeting on July 3, 2014, among foreign ministry officials, in [[Washington, D.C.]], to discuss the situation. The resolution was passed with the support of all OAS member states other than the United States and Canada.<ref>Main, Alexander, [http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/the-americas-blog/us-on-its-own-once-again-at-oas-meeting-on-argentinean-sovereign-debt "U.S. on Its Own, Once Again, at OAS Meeting on Argentinean Sovereign Debt"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140714131501/http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/the-americas-blog/us-on-its-own-once-again-at-oas-meeting-on-argentinean-sovereign-debt |date=2014-07-14 }}, CEPR website, July 9, 2014</ref>

In July 2014, a U.S. federal judge ruled in favor of NML Capital Ltd., a unit of Michael Sheehan's Elliott Management, against [[Argentina]]. The country owes its creditors more than $1.3 billion.{{Sfn|Slater|2014}} According to Mark Weidemaier, a law professor at the [[University of North Carolina]], the ruling was one of "the most significant litigation victories that a holdout creditor has ever achieved" in the realm of sovereign debt.{{Sfn|Slater|2014}} A July 2014 article in ''[[The Wall Street Journal]]'' by [[Georgetown University|Georgetown]] [[Georgetown University Law Center|Law professor]] Adam J. Levitin argued that the relationship between distressed securities investors and the U.S. court system should be revisited. He claimed that while these distressed debt [[investment funds]] can choose to "play the game" and "put their head in the mouth of the [[Leviathan]]", the U.S. courts should not choose to.{{Sfn|Levitin|2014}}